Question

Traditionally the typical college level Business Law course focused students' attention on acting within the minimum standards set by the law. Unfortunately, many businesses and business leaders view the law (and its setting of minimum standards of behavior) as the pinnacle of what they should strive to do. Ethics focuses more on what is right, regardless of whether or not it is legal.

Consider the following hypothetical scenario: An internet browser company known as Duodecillion provides a "chatroom" for free to users of the Duodecillion browser. Duodecillion requires users of the chat room to click an "I agree with these terms" button before using the chatroom. Buried within those terms is language explaining the Duodecillion is going to run computer algorithms on users' chats and sell data to individuals, groups or companies which might be interested in marketing to targeted individuals.

For instance, one Duodecillion customer was a university medical research school wanting to find possible subjects to test an experimental liver cancer vaccine. The medical center paid Duodecillion for a list of individuals, who through their chats, might seem like there is a family history of liver cancer. The university then contacted those people to see if they would be willing to be a subject in their vaccine test.

Another Duodecillion customer asked Duodecillion for a list of individuals who both (1) expressed a hatred toward certain racial groups living within the United States and (2) had a strong probability of owning more than one firearm or experience building explosives. Duodecillion's lawyers have stated that the chatroom platform is a place where individuals can express hateful or even potentially criminal ideas, but as long as the chats are not expressly advocating specific terror activities, are perfectly lawful. Furthermore the Duodecillion lawyers have said that Duodecillion has a 1st Amendment right to collect and sell the data the the customer asking for the above list.

Do you believe Duodecillion is acting ethically if it sells the list? Do you think Duodecillion has an ethical obligation to try to limit the free speech of individuals chatting "hate" in the chatroom? Why or why not?

Answer 1

Answer:

Duodecillion is not acting ethically if it sells the list to the customers who are contracting with Duodecillion for the list of users chatting over its platform. Users who agree to the terms and contract merely read all those clauses of the contract and for using the website they just simply click over the “agree to the terms and contract” box. Moreover, user also has right to privacy. Duodecillion should rather clearly specify that it would sell the user’s data and chat to their customer and then it should ask to confirm to this special clause. If the user confirms, then it would be the ethical responsibility of the user. But in this case, it is the ethical and moral responsibility of Duodecillion of not to sell the data of the user as it may pose threat to their identity or to their life in certain circumstances.

Duodecillion should ethically limit the free speech of the individuals chatting “hate” in the chat room. Since, hate may lead to the rise of the criminal emotion and sense of the user; it may lead them to conduct some criminal activity if they make up a mind that it is ethical and normal to do so. Moreover, such a chat provision may result into the gathering of likeminded people who may come together to conduct a bigger crime and may become threat to the society.